1

 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA     CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

             CIVIL  APPEAL No.2889     OF  2009

                 [Arising out of SLP(C) No.24533 of 2008 ]

   DAMODHAR                                                 

...   Appellant(s)

                     Versus    SECR.INDUSTRIAL,ENERGY & LAB.DEPTT.& ORS ...  Respondent(s)

O R D E R  

Delay condoned.

Leave granted.

The  appellant  is  working  in  the  establishment  of  the  Registrar,  

Industrial  Court,  Maharashtra,  Mumbai.   His  case  was referred  to  the  Scheduled  

Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Nagpur Division, Nagpur, for verification of his  

tribe claim as Halba, Scheduled Tribe community, by a letter dated 25th January, 2006.  

In  order  to  verify  the  claim  of  the  appellant,  the  Screening/Scrutiny  Committee  

conducted an inquiry  through the Police Vigilance Cell, which had also recorded the  

statement of the appellant's nephew on 7th August, 2006 regarding the socio-cultural  

traits, characteristics and customs, which did not seem to match those of the  Halba  

Scheduled  Tribe.   The  copy  of  the  said  report  being  served  on  the  appellant,  he

2

disagreed with the same and subsequently, the Scrutiny Committee directed him to  

appear  before  it  on  18th January,  2007.   When  the  matter  was  taken  up  for  

consideration by the Committee, the appellant indicated that he was withdrawing his  

claim as Halba Scheduled Tribe, but that he should be given the benefits of belonging  

to the Koshti Special Backward Category since in the meantime, an amendment had  

been made with regard to the categorisation of  Halba Scheduled Tribe and Koshti  

Special Backward Classes.

On the basis of the said submissions, the Screening Committee cancelled the  

certificate  granted  to  the  appellant  by  the  Executive  Magistrate,  Nagpur  on  22nd  

August, 1980

Aggrieved by the said order the appellant moved the High Court in its writ  

jurisdiction where apart from challenging the cancellation of the certificate granted to  

him, the appellant also prayed that he be given the benefits of belonging to the Special  

Backward Classes on account of his belonging to the Koshti community.

The writ petition having been dismissed, the appellant has filed the special leave  

petition (now appeal) which is now being heard.

On  behalf  of  the  respondents,  it  has  been  submitted  that  pursuant  to  

cancellation of the appellant's caste certificate, no action has been taken against the  

appellant to his detriment, and, in fact, he is continuing in service though, he cannot be  

entitled to any benefit derived from the certificate, which had initially been granted to  

him, after the decision of the Constitution Bench in the case of State of Maharashtra

3

Vs. Milind and others, [2001 (1) SCC 4], wherein it had been held that 'Halba Koshti'  

is not a scheduled tribe and that Koshti  was, in fact, a category under the Special  

Backward Classes.

It was pointed out that the aforesaid decision had taken into consideration all  

the issues which have also been raised in this appeal and, in fact, covers the case of the  

appellant.   In  paragraph 38  of  the  judgment  in  Milind's case  (supra)  it  has  been  

indicated that in view of the passage of time it was being made clear that admissions  

and  appointments   having  been  become  final  would  remain  unaffected  by  the  

judgment.

Since it has been submitted on behalf of the respondents that the appellant's  

services are not being disturbed on account of  the cancellation of his certificate, there  

seems to be little purpose in the filing of the present appeal.  However, while holding  

that the appellant's case will also be covered by the decision in Milind's case (supra),  

we also indicate that if any benefit is   claimed by him on the basis of his earlier status,  

such claim may be reviewed by the respondents in accordance with law.    

The appeal is disposed of accordingly.  

Any  observations  made  by  the  High  Court  with  regard  to  the   certificate  

granted to the appellant earlier, will not be applied against him to his detriment.   

             .......................J.                           (ALTAMAS KABIR)  

4

             .......................J.                       (Dr. MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA)           

New Delhi,      April 27,  2009.